Upload
others
View
4
Download
1
Embed Size (px)
Citation preview
Identifying Perceptual Factors Affect Intrinsic Career
Success by Delphi Method Mohsen Jajarmizadeh
∗, Tahereh Feizi
∗∗, Narges Abbasi
∗∗∗ & Hojat
Moshtaghian Abarghooi∗∗∗∗
Abstract Models are central to scientific thinking and essential to many kinds of
practical problem solving. Given the importance and application of
models and lack of any theoretical model of intrinsic career success,
and also taking into account the importance of intrinsic career success
in new career paradigm, the purpose of this research was design model
of perceptual factors affecting intrinsic career success in service firms
of Fars Province. In this regard initially with literature study,
perceptual factors were considered. Then through the Delphi process
using expert opinion in four steps, the most important factors in
research population were identified. Finally with consensus of experts,
after the fourth round of the Delphi, seven factors, as most perceptual
factors were selected and on the basis of theoretical foundations, the
model designed. These factors were: perceived organizational support,
person-organization fit, perceived career path, learning climate, career
self-efficacy, intrinsic motivation at work and organizational self-
esteem. Conclusions and recommendations of study can help the career
success of employees in service organizations and other similar
companies in Iran.
Keywords: Intrinsic career success, Perception, Model building, Delphi
method
Introduction
In the past, organizations were described as hierarchical structures were
working in static environments thus jobs were predictable and safe.
Nowadays, organizations and environments are quite dynamic and
careers are unpredictable and multi directional (Wiese, Freund & Baltes,
2002, Baruch, 2006). These changes at the micro level have been
followed by change in norms, values and attitudes to work (Abele &
∗ Mohsen Jajarmizadeh, Assistant Professor, Faculty of Management, Payame
Noor University, Shiraz, Iran. Email: [email protected] ∗∗
Tahereh Feizi, Associate Professor, Faculty of Management, Payame Noor
University, Tehran, Iran ∗∗∗
Narges Abbasi, Associate Professor, Faculty of Management, Payame Noor
University, Shiraz, Iran ∗∗∗∗
Moshtaghian Abarghooi, PhD Student, Faculty of Management, Payame
Noor University, Tehran, Iran
Identifying Perceptual Factors… Mohsen, Tahereh, Narges & Hojat
Journal of Managerial Sciences Volume VIII Number 2 251
Spurk, 2009). In new paradigm intrinsic career has overcome extrinsic
career (Fourie & Van Vuuren, 1998 ). Schein separate concept of job in
two branches, internal and external. External job is defined as
opportunities and constraints that exist in a career or organization that is
in accordance with organizational definition of success, and intrinsic
career involves the person's career developments over time and how the
person understands it (Schein, 1990). Also in literature of career success,
unlike extrinsic success is defined on the basis of organizational criteria
such as wage and hierarchical promotion, intrinsic success focuses on the
role of person and individual's perception of success and self-
actualization (Arnold & Cohen, 2008; Baruch, 2006; Dries Nicky, 2010).
The emergence of the knowledge based economy followed by a range of
new challenges for theory and research of career. A key challenge
is emphasizing on growing importance of subjective career and related
outcomes. Analysis of behavioral science theory in the fields of
psychology, social psychology and sociological theories, boundary less
career theory, smart career theory, growth and consistency theory and …
shows that today, although objective measures of career such as
hierarchies, promotion and compensation are important, but due to
limitations in the scope of the career and the organization, exclusive
emphasis on these criteria can lead to problems. Considering the
importance of perception in subjective career success, the purpose of this
research is answer the question that in personnel of Fars service
companies what are the most important perceptual factors affect
subjective career success and these factors how affect each other?
Literature Review
Scientific understanding of the world is often expressed as models.
Scientists, utilize models to predict and control the world. In fact, most
of knowledge in social and behavioral science is based on statistical
models. The model can be defined as an abstraction of reality, (while still
expressing its essential features) that is designed to simplify and
regularize our view of reality (Nakmyas, 1992: p. 44, quoted in Houman,
2011: p. 67).
Model, is a small and reconstructed part of an object, or a large
phenomenon; that, in terms of functionality, is same with the real object
or phenomenon. Thus, when access to all the details and relations is
difficult, expensive and time-consuming, the model with providing the
ability to analyze and predict the results makes it easy (Gorji et al, 2009:
33). Model is a structure for the theory. An effective model should be
able to help predict events. Models create the relationship between the
theory and the collection and analysis of information. Models embody
certain aspects of the real world that are related with the object under
investigation, clear significant relationships among these aspects and
Identifying Perceptual Factors… Mohsen, Tahereh, Narges & Hojat
Journal of Managerial Sciences Volume VIII Number 2 252
finally, provide the possibility of testing theories regarding the nature of
relationships (Farhangi & Safarzadeh, 2006: 69). The first step in
modeling is identification and determination of related variables. In this
study, for identify the most important perceptual factors affecting
subjective career success Delphi method was used.
In contemporary studies of careers, career success has received
considerable interest as an important outcome of the individual’s career
experiences (Arthur et al., 2005; Heslin, 2005). Career success is defined
as the positive psychological or work-related outcomes or achievements
one accumulates as a result of work experiences (Seibert, et al, 1999). In
other studies, career success is also described as positive outcomes of a
person’s career experiences (Abele & Spurk, 2009; Arnold & Cohen,
2008; Heslin, 2005). A conceptual distinction between objective and
subjective measures of career success has frequently been made (Arthur,
et al., 2005). Objective career success mostly relates to observable
attainments such as salary, salary growth, number of promotions or
hierarchical status (Arnold & Cohen, 2008). On the other hand,
subjective career success may be defined as the individual’s personal and
internal apprehension and evaluation of career across any aspects that are
important to that individual (Hall & Moss, 1998). Subjective career
success takes the internal perspective using a person’s own preferences
in the career experience (Arthur, et al., 2005). Even though objective
career criteria have dominated career research for several decades,
recently, subjective criteria have increasingly been discussed (Heslin,
2005). As the modern career context emphasizes mobility and
unpredictability, subjective career success has been a construct of
considerable interest to career scholars. Through critical analysis, Arnold
and Cohen (2008) identified two broad strands of career research.
According to their argument, one strand concerns the ways of construing
career success and the other concerns predictors of the success. The
current study falls within the latter strand, and considering importance of
perception in subjective career success, aimed to investigate the
perceptual predictors of subjective career success. In this research
initially to identify perceptual factors, related articles, dissertations and
research projects, were studied. Considering literature of career success
is seen that there is no macro and holistic vision, and most studies have
partial perspective and consider two or more factors only. And although
in behavioral and personality factors affecting career success extensive
researches is done, but about perceptual factors affecting subjective
career success, there is no comprehensive research. So research plan does
not underlie on a particular theory of career success. So with identifying
perceptual factors affecting career success and their relations, in
inductive plan, the model of perceptual factors affect subjective career
success has been suggested. For this purpose by studying the literature,
Identifying Perceptual Factors… Mohsen, Tahereh, Narges & Hojat
Journal of Managerial Sciences Volume VIII Number 2 253
15 perceptual factors that directly or indirectly affect subjective career
success were identified that shown in the Table 1.
Table 1: Perceptual factors affecting subjective career success identified
from literature
Researches Perceptual factors Row
Nabi (2003), Sidika (2011), Ditsela
(2012)
Perceived job security 1
Wanga (2011), Ditsela (2012) Wage perception 2
Nabi (2003), Aryee, et al., (1994), Ans
De Vos (2011), Wanga (2011), Alberto
Ismaael, et al, (2011)
Perceived career path 3
Wanga (2011) Organization's reputation
Ng, et al, (2005), Aryee, et al, (1994),
Supangco (2010), Yu Chen (2010),
Rasdi (2009), Kapoutsis & Thanos
(2007)
Perceived organizational
support
5
Feldman & Barton (1998 ) learning climate 6
Valcour & Ladge (2008), Ng, et al.,
(2005), Wanga (2011), Abele &Spurk
(2009), Ditsela (2012), Riordan&
Potgieter (2011), Kim, et al, (2008),
Day& Allen (2004), Higgins, et al,
(2008)
Career self efficacy 7
Wanga (2011), Supangco (2010),
Guohong (2010)
Leader member exchange 8
Wanga (2011), Wahiza (2011), Zoharah
(2011), Yu Chen (2010), Rasdi, et al,
(2009)
Person organization fit 9
Rasdi, et al, (2009)(2011) Work centrality 10
Seibert, et al, (1999), Hall & Chandler
(2005), Enache, et al, (2011), Zella
(2002)
Protean career attitude 11
Ebi, et al, (2003), Arthur & Khapova
(2005)
boundary less career
Orientation
12
Guohong (2010) Perceived organizational
trust
13
Callanan (2003), Kim (2005), John
Kammeyer, et al, (2008), Lee & Peccei
(2007)
Organizational based self
esteem
14
Koay Poh Cheng (2010) Perceived organizational
justice
15
Material and Methods
The usual process in quantitative research is reviewing literature for
selecting an appropriate theory, making hypotheses, and then statistical
analysis and testing the model. In contrast, in the qualitative approach
Identifying Perceptual Factors… Mohsen, Tahereh, Narges & Hojat
Journal of Managerial Sciences Volume VIII Number 2 254
may there is no theory related to the study or researchers maybe have
been reluctant to limit their work to the existing theories. Thus, the
qualitative approach could be used to build a new theory or explain new
patterns in data. However, qualitative approach emphasizing the depth
and quality of data (Hussey & Hussey, 1997: p. 55-65). In such studies
that are mainly exploratory and seek to build conceptual models and
theoretical frameworks, often the final results are not known (Baumard
& Ibert, 2001: pp. 79-80). In this study, with reviewing literature we
found that although a career success is investigated in historical,
philosophical or ideological view point (Nicky Dries, 2010), but in
researches that have examined the factors affecting career success, there
is no macro and holistic view point and most of research just has
investigated two or more factors. And although extensive researches
done in behavioral or personality factors influencing career success, but
there is no comprehensive research about perceptual factors. For this
reason, the quantitative approach in this study, may lead to neglect some
perceptual factors, because in quantitative approach, construction of
theoretical frameworks which is a prerequisite to the hypothesis, puts the
research in the definite and predetermined form which not have the
necessary flexibility to deal with new situations. Therefore, for
identifying perceptual factors, a qualitative approach was used; that there
is no a predetermined framework, theory or model (Coyer, 2000: pp. 78-
79; Easterby, 2002: pp. 46-47).To do this, firstly by reviewing literature,
a comprehensive understanding of antecedents of subjective career
success was obtained. And the results were completed using the Delphi
method with experts' opinions. Results of reviewing literature are shown
in table 1.Then, through a Delphi process in four stages, seven factors
select as the most important factor affecting subjective career success in
the statistical community, and finally using theoretical foundations, the
path model was developed.
Delphi Method
In this study, Delphi method was used for identifying the most important
factors. Delphi is a systematic method that is used to extract opinions
from a group of experts on a topic or question (Powell, 2004). The
validity and reliability of findings of Delphi method come from
combining expert judgments. In addition, the anonymity of Delphi
participants allows them to interact, rethink, and compare their thoughts
in a ‘non-threatening forum’, without being influenced by each other’s
opinion (Miller, 1993). The Delphi technique, mainly developed by
Dalkey (1972) at the Rand Corporation in the 1950s, is a widely used and
accepted method for achieving convergence of opinion concerning real-
world knowledge solicited from experts within certain topic areas.
Predicated on the rationale that, ‘two heads are better than one, or...n
Identifying Perceptual Factors… Mohsen, Tahereh, Narges & Hojat
Journal of Managerial Sciences Volume VIII Number 2 255
heads are better than one’. The Delphi technique is designed as a group
communication process that aims at conducting detailed examinations
and discussions of a specific issue for the purpose of goal setting, policy
investigation, or predicting the occurrence of future events (Ludwig,
1997).
The Delphi technique is well suited as a means and method for
consensus-building by using a series of questionnaires to collect data
from a panel of selected subjects (Young & Jamieson, 2001). Ludwig
(1994) indicates: Iterations refer to the feedback process. The process
was viewed as a series of rounds; in each round every participant worked
through a questionnaire which was returned to the researcher who
collected, edited, and returned to every participant a statement of the
position of the whole group and the participant’s own position. A
summation of comments made each participant aware of the range of
opinions and the reasons underlying those opinions (p. 55). Other notable
characteristics inherent with using the Delphi technique are the ability to
provide anonymity to respondents, a controlled feedback process, and the
suitability of a variety of statistical analysis techniques to interpret the
data (Douglas, 1983). These characteristics are designed to offset the
shortcomings of conventional means of pooling opinions obtained from a
group interaction (i.e., influences of dominant individuals, noise, and
group pressure for conformity). (Hasson & Mckenna, 2000). The
required condition for the application of Delphi are: need to opinions and
judgment of experts, the need for a broad consensus of the group in
achieving results, the complex, large and interdisciplinary problems or
incomplete knowledge, the availability of experienced and skilled
professionals, the need for anonymity of data collection, lack of time
constraints and the lack of other effective methods (Harold et al, 2002;
Windle, 2004). In Delphi, the data is transferred without physical
contact. And the participants do not know the other individuals involved
in the study. Or at least their responses are anonymous. Anonymity of
participants, with each group member the opportunity to express their
opinions, and the present ideas without stress, this would facilitate the
open responses and leads to insight and knowledge acquisition in the
study. In some cases, people may know each other, However, the
responses are typically not available (Hsu, et al, 2008; Okoli, et al,
2004).
High flexibility of approach, applied in different areas, using
different communication approaches, usability in a wide geographic area,
no need for training interviewers, anonymity, and providing an open
discussion to identify and understand the underlying issue of are the
advantages of Delphi. Other benefits of achieving consensus in
opposition groups is to validate the content and program design with
partial support from the participants (McKenna et al, 2002); no effect of
Identifying Perceptual Factors… Mohsen, Tahereh, Narges & Hojat
Journal of Managerial Sciences Volume VIII Number 2 256
panel beliefs on group, freedom from pressure, facilitating honestly in
panel and offer honest unbiased opinion are other features of Delphi.
Also feedback between stages, resulting in the creation of new ideas and
the knowledge, innovation and the education to participants. Delphi
avoids wasting time and energy for irrelevant or biased decisions.
Because Delphi predictions take place with an analytical and
systematical approach (Powell, 2003).
Formation and Composition of the Panel
Choose experts for Delphi, unlike some quantitative surveys will not be
done based on probabilistic sampling; Because Delphi, is a mechanism
for group decision-making, and requires qualified professionals who
have deep understand and knowledge in the subject, selection of group
members usually done through non-probability sampling. One of the
techniques used in the field is judgmental sampling. This approach
assumes that the researcher's knowledge about the selection of group
members are usable (Harold et al, 2002).If the researcher himself does
not know all appropriate people to join the group can make use of serial
sampling which is other kind of non-probability method. In this way, the
researcher begins with identify an eligible individual or group of them
and through them achieve other appropriate people. This method is used
especially when it is difficult to identify appropriate people. Appropriate
number of members is an important thing that must be noted on the
formation of group. Like any other type of sampling, sample size
depends on factors such as access to people, the time required and the
cost of data collection. In Delphi method, building consensus among
panel as the purpose of this method with increase in number of panel
becomes more difficult. Although the number of panel in previous
studies have ranged from 10 to 1685 people, but when there is
heterogeneity among group members, about 10 to 20 members is
recommended (Mashayekhi et al, 2005: pp. 201). In this research in
selection of Delphi experts, expertise, knowledge and experience in the
field of human resource management and organizational behavior, their
teaching years on related topics, their articles and writings, have been
considered. And through judgmental sampling, the agreement of 24
experts was obtained, whose characteristics are as follows:
Table 2: Characteristics of Delphi panel
Average of
experience
Number of
people
Type of experience
10 years 18 Faculty member in Shiraz university , Payame
Noor university and Azad university of shiraz
in human resource management, organizational
behavior , education management and
Identifying Perceptual Factors… Mohsen, Tahereh, Narges & Hojat
Journal of Managerial Sciences Volume VIII Number 2 257
psychology
15 years 4 Senior director of human resources
management , organizational behavior and
organizational development in organizations
linked to the target population
11 years 2 Senior specialist of companies working in the
field of human resource management,
organizational behavior and organizational
development
After selecting the panel and the design of the questionnaire and the
necessary coordination, four round of Delphi performed. Table 3 shows
the distribution and collection date of questionnaires in each round.
Table 3: The four round of Delphi Distributions the questioners Return of
questionnaires
Distribution Date The number of
panel
Last date
of return
Number of
Return
The mean
number of
follow-up
Round
2012/12/10 to
2012/12/20
30 2013/1/5 24 9 times First
2013/1/9 to 2013/1/19 24 2013/1/28 24 4 times Second
2013/1/29 to 2013/2/8 24 2013/4/6 24 3 times Third
2013/4/9 to 2013/4/14 24 2013/4/19 24 3 times Fourth
Results and Discussion
The first round of the Delphi
With literature studies, 15 perceptual were identified that directly or
indirectly impact on subjective career success. These factors were used
in the questionnaire of first round. These factors have been described in
Table 4.
Table 4: Factors affecting subjective career success extracted from the
literature
Variable Row
Perception of career security 1
Perception of the rights and benefits 2
Perceived career path 3
Perceived corporate reputation 4
Perceived organizational support 5
Perceived learning climate 6
Career self efficacy 7
Perception of the relationship with the supervisor 8
Person-organization fit 9
Identifying Perceptual Factors… Mohsen, Tahereh, Narges & Hojat
Journal of Managerial Sciences Volume VIII Number 2 258
Work centrality 10
Protean Career Attitudes 11
Boundary less career orientation 12
Perceived organizational trust 13
Organizational based self esteem 14
Perceived organizational justice 15
In the first round, a list of mentioned factors were give to panel to
determine their importance in influencing subjective career success.
Furthermore, in an open-ended question asked them to present other
perceptual factors that are not in list. The results of first round showed
that from 34 factors, perceived learning climate with average of 4.62 and
perceived trust with average of 2.66, had highest and lowest scores
respectively. Moreover, at the end of the first round questionnaire was
placed an open ended question for the experts' opinions about other
factors affecting the subjective career success, resulting in identification
of other 15 perceptual factors. These 19 factors were used in the
questionnaire of second round, which have been mentioned in Table 5.
Table 5: Perceptual factors introduced in the first round of the Delphi
Perceptual Factor Row
Optimism 1
Role clarity 2
Change acceptance 3
Perceived organizational participation 4
Perception of the potential growth of employability 5
Perception of a lack of gender discrimination 6
Perceived ethical behavior 7
Perceived spirituality at work 8
Perceived stress at work 9
Perceived conflict 10
Intrinsic motivation at work 11
Career resilience 12
Perceived discretion at work 13
Public service motivation 14
Perception of overall success in life. 15
Perceived social capital at work 16
Perception of occupational prestige 17
Perceived meritocracy 18
Perceived family support 19
The Second Round of the Delphi
In the second round, viewpoints of panel in relation to the impact of
perceptual factors introduced in the first round were evaluated. The
second round results indicate that intrinsic motivation at work with score
Identifying Perceptual Factors… Mohsen, Tahereh, Narges & Hojat
Journal of Managerial Sciences Volume VIII Number 2 259
of 4.56 and ethical behavior with score of 3.38 had the highest and
lowest scores respectively. In general in first and second round of
Delphi, 34 perceptual factors were evaluated by panel, which from these
34 factors, 15 factors were extracted from the literature and 19 factors
were extracted from expert’s opinion. Results of first and second rounds
are described in table 6.
Table 6: significance test of comparison between mean score of panel
view and criterion score in the first and second rounds
Identifying Perceptual Factors… Mohsen, Tahereh, Narges & Hojat
Journal of Managerial Sciences Volume VIII Number 2 260
The third round of the Delphi
In the third round, viewpoints of panel on the factors that their
importance in the first and second rounds were high and very high (mean
of more than 4 on a Likert scale of 1 to 5), re-received. For this purpose,
the mean score and the score of each of the nine factors introduced in the
last period sent to panel and they were asked, if necessary, according to
the group idea, correct their previous opinions. The results showed that
the mean score of factors at this stage, varied from 4.25, corresponding
to career self efficacy to 3.58, corresponding to the perceived
meritocracy. The results of the Friedman test showed that, at this stage,
the mean score of all factors, except the perception of meritocracy and
public service motivation are more than 4, and the differences are
significant. So, all factors except perception of meritocracy and the
public service motivation were accepted. Results of third round are
shown in Figure 7.
Table 7: Significance test of difference between mean scores of panel
view and criteria in the third round
Identifying Perceptual Factors… Mohsen, Tahereh, Narges & Hojat
Journal of Managerial Sciences Volume VIII Number 2 261
The fourth round of the Delphi
In the fourth round, the views of members on factors that their
importance were high and very high in third round, re-received. For this
purpose, the mean score of each variable and the panel scores, sent back
to them and they asked correct it, if necessary. The results showed that
the mean scores ranged from 4.27 for perceived career path to 4.25 for
career self efficacy. Also Friedman test showed that the mean scores for
all factors have significant differences with the criterion. Results of
fourth round are described in Figure 8.
Table 8: Significance test of difference between mean scores of panel
view and criteria in the fourth round
Consensus of Experts
The consensus of experts is in an effort to reach agreement on the
reviewed issue and sometimes tries to identify the differences. Consensus
doesn't mean finding the right answer, but is merely agreement of the
participants in a particular subject (Kennedy, 2004). Smith provides a
measure to make decisions about the agreement or further rounds of
Delphi. This measure reflects the strong consensus among group
members that is determined based on Kendall's coefficient of
concordance. Kendall's W (also known as Kendall's coefficient of
concordance) is a non-parametric statistic. It is a normalization of the
statistic of the Friedman test, and can be used for assessing agreement
among raters. Kendall's W ranges from 0 (no agreement) to 1 (complete
agreement). Kendall's coefficient of concordance shows that people who
have arranged a number of categories based on their importance, have
the same criteria to judge the importance of each of the items and in this
respect they agree with each other. In the absence of such consensus, be
constant or negligible growth in two consecutive rounds, proves that
consensus is not increased, and the survey should be stopped (Siegel and
Castellan, 1988).In this research, to determine the degree of consensus
among the panel, Kendall’s coefficient of concordance was used. The
results showed that Kendall’s coefficient of concordance in Stage III was
0.511 and in stage IV was 0.546 that only has increased0.035, that
means adequacy of rounds. Another criterion that demonstrates the
adequacy of results, as well as the adequacy of the number of rounds of
Identifying Perceptual Factors… Mohsen, Tahereh, Narges & Hojat
Journal of Managerial Sciences Volume VIII Number 2 262
Delphi, is the standard deviation of factors in periods. The results of
reviewing standard deviation of the Delphi rounds indicates that the
average of standard deviation of 34 factors in the first and the second
rounds was 0.76, and the mean of standard deviation of nine factors in
the first and second rounds was 0.68, that for nine factors in the third
round dropped to 0.55, and for 7 factors in the fourth round dropped to
0.51. Reduction in standard deviation of the responses of the experts in
rounds, represents the consensus among experts.
Conclusion
In general, using the experts opinions in Delphi, seven perceptual factors
were identified and were used as the main factors in the model building.
That they are: (1) perceived organizational support, (2) career self
efficacy, (3) intrinsic motivation at work, (4) perceived career path, (5)
organizational based self esteem, (6) perceived learning climate (7)
person organization fit. The following, are briefly described:
Perceived organizational support
Perceived organizational support is the general belief of personnel about
the contribution of organization in caring about their welfare and
commitment to them (Eisenberger, et al, 2002). Concept of perceived
organizational support is on the basis of interpretation of social exchange
theory that the employees expand their efforts to improve their social and
financial earning. Of course there is an alternative view of organizational
commitment that emphasizes emotional ties rather than economic
outlook. In this definition, commitment is the sense of integrity that
results in increasing productivity and reducing turnover and absenteeism
(Arizi & golparvar, 2010: pp. 149-150). The impact of perceived
organizational support on career success has been studied in researches
of Rasdi (2009), Supangco (2010), N.G. (2005), Aryee and Tan (1994),
Yuchen (2010), Kapoutsis & Thanos (2011).
Person-organization Fit
Person's behavior is a common function of the relationship between
person and environment. When there is satisfaction in this relationship,
productivity, creativity and stability increases (Vilela, et al, 2008).
Person-organization Fit represents compatibility of personality, attitudes
and values of individuals with organizational values, goals, structures,
processes and culture (Carless, 2005; Vilela, et al, 2008).
Perceived Career Path
Extended integration, structural reconstitution and miniaturization, which
severely restricted the opportunity for hierarchical promotion, often leads
to the perception of plateau in career path. In addition lack of intrinsic
Identifying Perceptual Factors… Mohsen, Tahereh, Narges & Hojat
Journal of Managerial Sciences Volume VIII Number 2 263
motivation, job stress and burnout are other causes of career plateau
(Barber, 1992: 1). Experts such as Barber (1992) speak of two factors,
plateau factor and stagnation factor cause career plateau. Situational
Career plateau simply is lack of promotional opportunities. It means the
labor has reached the hierarchical level that have any hope for
increasing salaries and benefits, position, title, authority and their social
status.
Perceived Learning Climate
Organizational climate is perceptions of individuals about the content,
features, events and processes of the organization. People in manner that
is meaningful for them, interpret and respond to situational variables.
Persons interaction in response to situations, produce an agreement that
is the basis of organizational climate. Organizational learning climate is
defined as what strengthens or prevents learning in organization (Argyris
& Schon 1996). N. G., et al, (2005) have stated that the learning climate
has an impact on subjective career success (Yongho Park, 2010).
Learning climate in the organization facilitates the learning of new
knowledge (Nabi, 2003). In this regard, Parker (2004), propose notion of
career association .They define job association as a social structure
defined by members through which individuals may obtain support for
the success in their career.
Intrinsic Career Motivation
For understanding intrinsic motivation at work, it is necessary to
understand its relevance to career self management. In contrast extrinsic
motivation based on rewards and threats controlled by organization,
internal motivation based on positive values that person experiences
directly from his duties. These positive experiences cause a person to
enjoy his work, be involved with it and takes energy from it (Thomas &
Tymon,1997). These feelings lead to self-management and self-
actualization in a job (Quigley & Tymon, 2005). Today, career literature
focuses on career self-management, while in the past mostly focused on
organizational practices including training, job rotation, job enrichment,
job ladders and organizational planned advancements (Feldman,2000). In
today's chaotic environment, organizations are not able to offer regular
programs for employees advancements and career self-management
behavior is one of the most important roles that has been delegated to
individual. Also intrinsic motivation at work is an important predictor of
career self-management behavior (Quigley and Tymon, 2005).
Career Self Efficacy
Bandura (2001), consistent with the idea of Weick (1996), describes
people through active action who try to become consistent with social
Identifying Perceptual Factors… Mohsen, Tahereh, Narges & Hojat
Journal of Managerial Sciences Volume VIII Number 2 264
environment, discover ways to overcome the limitations of it, redesign
and restructure environment and make behavioral styles to enable them
to achieve the desired results.In Bandura's self-efficacy theory, it is said
that people who have a strong belief in their ability, insist on doing their
duty more, and have higher performance. According to Bandura,
knowledge, skills and previous achievements are not good predictors of
future performance, but beliefs about one’s abilities affect his
performance (Latham & Pinder,2005).
Organization-based Self Esteem
Organization-based self -esteem answers the question how much a
person perceives he/she has valuable assistance in organization. High
organization-based self esteem means that the individual considers
himself important and effective in realization of organizational goals
(Pierce & Gardner, 2004). The researches results indicate that this
personal belief system has important organizational implications.
Personnel with high organizational self-esteem are more effective than
others. Because they try further to improve their performance, have more
favorable attitudes about their employer, solve crisis and complicated
issues, have more voluntary self-guiding and self-control behaviors and
have less intention to leave organization (Pierce&Gardner,2004).
Protection and promotion of organizational Self-esteem is one of the
most important ways to maintain and improve employee motivation and
consequently increase their productivity.
The Conceptual Model
After that researcher identifies a variety of variables and their
relationships, he can develop a conceptual model or framework of the
study. Conceptual framework is the basis that outline of the research is
based on it. This framework, is the network of relationships between
variable, have been identified based on the results of the interviews,
observations and literature review. Literature review provides a coherent
basis for developing conceptual framework (Danaeefard, et al, 2008,
111). In this study, based on results of Delphi, and theoretical literature
of classification of the perceptual factors, conceptual model was
developed, which is shown in Figure 1.Triandis (1970) and Richard
(1994) have detailed arguments concerning potential factors affecting the
perception of the person, that part of their views regarding the division of
perceptual factors has been considered in this study. In formation process
of perception, two sources involved. One source refers to all external
stimuli that encounters the perceiver and creates objective information
for him; the second source refers to all the data associated with a
perceiver's mind that is stored in person. A person cannot absorb and
exploit all of the information; Thus in perception process, firstly,
Identifying Perceptual Factors… Mohsen, Tahereh, Narges & Hojat
Journal of Managerial Sciences Volume VIII Number 2 265
selective screening of external stimuli, and elimination of non-relevant
stimuli, and secondly, selective retrieval of information stored, to provide
information relevant to the shaping of perception are involved. Thus,
perception can be considered as a combination of objective data and
subjective performance of perceiver, including screening, review and
processing. This distinction between objectives subjective can be
understood as a basis for classification of perceptual factors based on
source of perception. First category is external stimuli, and the second is
person features, which affect the perceiver mental functions. The
stimulants of first category includes all factors that originate from verbal
or physical behavior, other persons, the content or the environment .The
second group refers to all factors that cover needs, values, expectations,
standards and aspirations of perceiver and impact on the method of
perceptual screening, reviewing and processing on the mind. Although
these two categories of perceptual factors interact, but often perceptual
factors with external stimulus affect perceptual factors with internal
stimulus And have temporal priority towards it (Richard, 1994).
Accordingly, we can classify the perceptual factors of Delphi, as follows
and formulate perceptual factors affecting subjective career success in
figure 1.
Table 9: Classification of identified perceptual factors based on the
origin of perception
perceptual factors with internal
stimulus
perceptual factors with external
stimulus
Intrinsic career motivation Perceived organizational support
Career self efficacy Perceived career path
Person-organization fit Perceived learning climate
Organizational based self esteem
Based on the above classification, the conceptual model can be depicted
as follows.
Figure 1: Conceptual Model
Identifying Perceptual Factors… Mohsen, Tahereh, Narges & Hojat
Journal of Managerial Sciences Volume VIII Number 2 266
As Figure 1 suggests, organizational support, career path and learning
climate, as perceptual factors of external origin, not only have positive
impact on subjective career success, but with effect on intrinsic
motivation at work, career self-efficacy, person-organization fit and
organizational based self-esteem, impact indirectly on subjective career
success. Due to the transition of the traditional career paradigm to new
career paradigm in firms of population, increasing knowledge workers,
the rapid obsolescence of skills, reduced job security and lifetime
employment, limitation in hierarchical promotion, the importance of
these identified perceptual factors become more known. Division of
perceptual factors as mentioned above helps enterprise policy makers to
priorities policies and programs in order to promote subjective career
success of employees. However, planning in order to reinforce
perceptual factors with internal origin, due to differences in people and
difficulty of internal changes, require long planning and enterprise-wide
changes, but perceptual factors with external origin are transparent and
programmable that can be included in human resource planning. Also
according to the unique needs of knowledge workers, organizational
support, planning for growth and career advancement and establishing a
learning organization are the most important factors that reinforce
motivation in this category of employees (Anvari & Moshtaghian, 2013).
When employees feel that their organizations are supportive, ensure their
career advancement and feel that they can improve their skills with
learning initiatives, follow job duties with more career self-efficacy,
focus on the common points with organization, make broad their
participation, become committed to their organization and with self-
management behaviors facilitate their career success. Also in relation to
perceptual factors with internal origin, with enrichment of jobs,
delegating responsibilities to staff and empowerment and matching the
organizational needs with skills of employees, staff will flourish in their
careers.
The aim of the research was designing conceptual model of
perceptual factors affecting subjective career success. Using of expert
opinion in Delphi method for identifying perceptual factors, in addition
to help in complementing the information of perceptual factors, also
resulting in localization of the model. The theoretical model proposed in
this study with fill the theoretical gap in this area and by providing
practical solutions for related companies can result in career success of
personnel. Custodians of human resources in relevant companies, must
with reinforcing introduced factors, and consequently enhanced
subjective career success, provide grounds for the growth and
development of their personnel. Also perceptual factors that have
external origin, it is necessary that in human resource planning
considered a high priority, because of with impact on other factors plays
Identifying Perceptual Factors… Mohsen, Tahereh, Narges & Hojat
Journal of Managerial Sciences Volume VIII Number 2 267
a major role in the career success of employees. Results of this study will
provide guidelines for successful transition from the traditional career
paradigm to the new career paradigm, with an emphasis on knowledge
workers. Considering that objective consequences of job (including
salary and benefits, and promotion) are costly, and limited organizational
resources, in new employment paradigm, strengthen the self-control
behaviors in staff is required. Implementation of research findings and
the proposed model, with strengthen the role of the individual, and focus
on the perceptions and reducing expectations from the organization, can
overcome the limitations of enterprise, and reinforce participation and
deployment of staff capacity. Given the importance of perception in
career success, it must be considered that in many corporate events, not
reality itself, but the perception of it, affects mind of personnel and
strengthen or weaken the morale of employees. In this context, it is
necessary that custodians of human resources with surveying thoughts
and perceptions provide fertile ground for corporate planning. Because
many organizational policies due to the lack of acceptance and
understanding in staff, fail in action. Also effects of perceptual factors
identified in this study should validate on an experimental basis in the
service firms of Fars Province. Thus, it is possible that with examine
theoretical foundations of research and relationships between variables,
design the path or structural equation model and test the proposed
relationships with statistical methods. Also measurement of introduced
perceptual factors and career success in the service firms helps human
resources planners to identify strengths and weaknesses in relation to the
enablers of career success. In addition, examine the impact of
demographic factors, including age, marital status, education and …on
career success, , will provide useful information for decision making in
human resources management. Like any research conducted using the
Delphi method, the results of this research is based on the judgment of
experts. Since the selection of members has been done with non-
probability sampling, is not representative of a particular community,
nevertheless necessary criteria considered in selecting members of the
panel. Another limitation of this study is the lack of a theoretical
foundation for the model. As mentioned above, the researchers
conducted in this area usually examine one or two factors affecting
subjective career success. However, research findings could be a first
step to build a theory. In this study, only perceptual factors affecting
subjective career success have been investigated. Future studies can
analyze other factors like personality factors, behavioral factors, and
others. Also interaction of objective and subjective career success, and
differences of career success in private and public sectors can be
considered in new studies.
Identifying Perceptual Factors… Mohsen, Tahereh, Narges & Hojat
Journal of Managerial Sciences Volume VIII Number 2 268
Reference List
Abele, A. E. & Spurk, D. (2009) The Longitudinal Impact of self-
efficacy and career goals on objective and subjective career
success. Journal of Vocational Behavior, 74(1), 53–62.
Anvari, A., & Mshtaghian, H. (2013) Identifies the factors affecting the
motivation of knowledge workers. The Twenty-Eighth
International Conference on Electrical, Tehran.
Arizi, H., & Golparvar, M. (2011) The path model of perceived
organizational support and their relationship with occupational,
professional and organizational variables. Managerial Studies in
Iran, 15(4), 147-173.
Arnold, J. & Cohen, L. (2008) The psychology of careers in industrial-
organizational settings: a critical but appreciative analysis.
International Review of Industrial/Organizational Psychology,
23, 1-44.
Arthur, M. B., Khapova S. N. & Wilderom C. P. M. (2005) Career
success in boundary less career world, Journal of Organizational
Behavior, 26(2), 177-202.
Aryee, S., Chay, Y. W. & Tan, H. H. (1994) An examination of the
antecedents of subjective career success among a managerial
sample in Singapore. Human Relations, 47(5), 487-509.
Bandura, A. (2001) Social cognitive theory: An agentic perspective.
Annual Review of Psychology, 52(1), 1-26.
Barber, (1992) E.H. Plateauism in the Workplace. Leisure Research
Symposium, NRPA National Congress, Cincinnati, OH.
Baruch, Y. (2006) Career development in organizations and beyond:
Balancing traditional and contemporary viewpoints. Human
Resource Management Review, 16(2), 125-138.
Baumard, P., & Ibert J. (2001) What approach with which data. In
Doing Management research: a comprehensive guide, London,
Sage.
Bretz, R. D. (1992) The relationship between person-organization fit and
career success practices. CAHRS Working Paper Series.
Cornell University. [Online] Available from:
http://digitalcommons.ilr.cornell.edu/cgi/viewcontent.cgi?article
=1294&context=cahrswp.
Callanan, G.A. (2003) What price career success ?. Career Development
International, 8(3), 126-133.
Carless, S.A. (2005) Person-Job fit versus person-organization fit as
predictors of organizational attraction and job acceptances
intentions: a longitudinal study. Journal of Occupational and
Organizational Psychology, 78(3), 411-429.
Identifying Perceptual Factors… Mohsen, Tahereh, Narges & Hojat
Journal of Managerial Sciences Volume VIII Number 2 269
Cesinger B. (2011) Career and success A literature review,
Stiftungslehrstuhl für Unternehmensgründungen und
Unternehmertum (Entrepreneurship) an der Universität
Hohenheim. [Online] Available from: http://www.dcc-
selbstaendig.de/WP/WP_01_2011.pdf
Chen, Y. (2011) Chinese knowledge employees’ career values, perceived
organizational support and career success. iBusiness, 3(3), 274-
282.
Chu, H., Hwang G. J. (2008) A Delphi-based approach to developing
expert systems with the cooperation of multiple experts. Expert
Systems with Applications; 34(4): 2826-40.
Colakoglu , N. S. (2011) The impact of career boundary lessens on
subjective career success: the role of career competencies, career
autonomy, and career insecurity. Journal of Vocational
Behavior, 79, 47–59.
Cryer, P. (2000) The Research Students Guide To Success. 2nd Ed,
Buckingham, Open university.
Cummings, L. L., Dunham, R. B., Pierce, J. L., & Gardner, D. G. (1989)
Organization-based self-esteem: Construct definition,
measurement, and validation. Academy of Management Journal,
32(3), 622-648.
Danaeefard, H., Alwani, S. M., Azar A. (2008) Quantitative Research
Methodology in Management: A Comprehensive Approach,
Eshraghi, Saffar publishing,
Daniel, C. F., & Barton A. W., (1988) Career plateaus reconsidered.
Journal of Management, 14(1), 69-80.
Day, R. & Allen, T.D. (2004) The relationship between career
motivation and self Efficacy with protégé career success,
Journal of Vocational Behavior, 64(1),72-91.
De Vos, A., & Soens, N. (2008) Protean attitude and career success: The
mediating role of self-management. Journal of Vocational
Behavior 73(3), 449–456.
De Vos, A., De Hauw, S., & Van der Heijden, B. I. (2011) Competency
development and career success: The mediating role of
employability. Journal of Vocational Behavior, 79(2), 438-447.
Ditsela, N. J. (2012) Factors involved in subjective career success of
soldiers in the south african national defense force: an expletory
study, Thesis submitted in partial fulfillment of the requirements
for the degree of master of commerce in industrial psychology at
Stellenbosch University.
Douglas, D. C. (1983) A comparative study of the effectiveness of
decision making processes which utilize the delphi and
leaderless group methodologies. Unpublished doctoral
dissertation, The Ohio State University, Columbus.
Identifying Perceptual Factors… Mohsen, Tahereh, Narges & Hojat
Journal of Managerial Sciences Volume VIII Number 2 270
Dries, N. (2010) The meaning of career success a closer inspection of
historical, cultural, and ideological contexts. Career
Development International,16(4), 364-384.
Easterby-Smith, M. T. R. & Lowe, A. (2002) Management Research: An
Introduction, 2nd
(ed), London, Sage.
Eisenberger, R., Huntington R., Hutchison S., & Sowa D. (1986)
Perceived organizational support. Journal of Applied
Psychology, 71, 500-507.
Enache, M., Sallan, J. M., Simo, P., & Fernandez, V. (2011) Examining
the impact of protean and boundaryless career attitudes upon
subjective career success. Journal of Management &
Organization, 17(4), 459–473.
Fink, A., Kosecoff, J., Chassin, M., & Brook, R. H. (1984) Consensus
methods: characteristics and guidelines for use. American
Journal of Public Health, 74(9), 979-983.
Guohong H. (1996) Trust and career satisfaction: the role of LMX.
Career Development International, 15(5), 437-458.
Hall, D.T. & Chandler, D.E. (2005) Psychological success: when the
career is a calling. Journal of Organizational Behavior, 26(2),
155-176.
Hasson, F., Keeney, S., & McKenna, H. (2000) Research guidelines for
the Delphi survey technique. Journal of Advanced
Nursing, 32(4), 1008-1015.
Helmer, O., & Rescher, N. (1959) On the epistemology of the inexact
science. Management Science, 6(1), 25-53.
Higgins, M. C., Dobrow, S. R., & Chandler, D. (2008) Never quite good
enough: The paradox of sticky developmental relationships for
elite university graduates. Journal of Vocational Behavior, 72(2),
207–224.
Hooman, H. A. (2011) Understanding the scientific method in the
behavioral sciences, The Study And Compiling Books of Social
Sciences (Samt), Tehran.
Hsu, C. C., & Sandford, B. A. (2007) The Delphi technique: making
sense of consensus. Practical Assessment, Research &
Evaluation, 12(10), 1-8.
Hui, C., & Lee, C. (2000) Moderating effects of organization-based self-
esteem on organizational uncertainty: Employee response
relationships. Journal of Management, 26(2), 215-232.
Hussey J., & Hussey R. (1997) Business Research. London, Mac Millan.
Kammeyer, Mueller, J. D., Judge, T. A., & Piccolo, R. F. (2008) Self-
esteem and extrinsic career success: Test of a dynamic model.
Applied Psychology, 57(2), 204-224.
Kapoutsis, I., & Thanos, I. (2007), Subjective career success: the role of
individual, structural and behavioural determinants, department
Identifying Perceptual Factors… Mohsen, Tahereh, Narges & Hojat
Journal of Managerial Sciences Volume VIII Number 2 271
of business administration, Athens University of Economics &
Business, Athens.
Keeney, S., Hasson, F. & McKenna, H. P. (2001) A critical review of the
Delphi technique as a research methodology for nursing. The
International Journal of Nursing Studies, 38(2): 195-200.
Kennedy, H. P. (2004) Enhancing Delphi research: methods and results.
Journal of Advanced Nursing, 45(5): 504-11.
Kim, S., Mone, M. A., & Kim, S. (2008) Relationships among self-
efficacy, pay-for-performance perceptions, and pay satisfaction:
A Korean examination. Human Performance, 21(2), 158-179.
Koay, P. C. (2010) A study of determinants of the intrinsic career
success. Master's thesis, University Utara Malaysia.
Latham, G.P. & Pinder, C. C. (2005) Work motivation theory and
research at the dawn of the twenty-first century. Annual Review
of Psychology, 56,485–516.
Lauver, K. J., & Kristof-Brown, A. (2001) Distinguishing between
employees' perceptions of person–job and person–organization
fit. Journal of Vocational Behavior, 59(3), 454-470.
Ludwig, B. (1997) Predicting the future: Have you considered using the
Delphi methodology? Journal of Extension, 35(5), 1-4.
Mashayekhi, Alinaghi, F., Momeni, A. A. M., & Sirous A. (2005) Key
Factors affecting the use of information technology in
government agencies - the application of the Delphi method.
Modarres Humanities, 9(3), 191-231.
McKenna, H., Hasson, F., Smith, M. (2002) A Delphi survey of
midwives and midwifery students to identify no midwifery
duties. Midwifery, 18(4), 314-22.
Miller, L. E. (2006) Determining what could/should be: The Delphi
technique and its application. Paper presented at the meeting of
the 2006 annual meeting of the Mid-Western Educational
Research Association, Columbus, Ohio.
Moran, E. T. & Volkwein, J. F. (1992) The cultural approach to the
formation of organizational climate. Human Relations, 45(1), 19-
47.
Nabi, G. R. (2003) Situational characteristics and subjective career
success: the mediating role of career-enhancing strategies,
International Journal of Manpower, 24(6), 651-671.
Ng, T. W. H., Eby, L. T., Sorensen, K. L., & Feldman, D. C. (2005)
Predictors of objective and subjective career success. A meta-
analysis. Personnel Psychology, 58(2), 367–408
Okoli C., & Pawlowski, S.D. (2004) The Delphi method as a research
tool: an example, design considerations and applications,
Information and Management, 42(1),15–29
Identifying Perceptual Factors… Mohsen, Tahereh, Narges & Hojat
Journal of Managerial Sciences Volume VIII Number 2 272
Pierce, J. L., & Gardner, D. G. (2004) Self-esteem within the
organizational context: A review of the organization-based self-
esteem literature. Journal of Management, 30(5), 591-622.
Powell, C. (2003) The Delphi technique: myths and realities. Journal of
Advanced Nursing, 41(4), 376-382.
Rasdi, R. M., Ismail, M., Uli, J., & Noah, S. M. (2009). Career
aspirations and career success among managers in the Malaysian
public sector. Research Journal of International Studies, 9, 21-
35.
Riggs W. E. (1983) The Delphi technique: an experimental evaluation,
Technological Forecasting and Social Change, 23(1), 89-94.
Riordan, S., & Louw-Potgieter, J. (2011). Career success of women
academics in South Africa. South African Journal of Psychology,
41(2), 157-172.
Seibert, S. E., & Kraimer, M. L. (2001) The five-factor model of
personality and career success, Journal of Vocational Behavior,
58(1), 1–21.
Singh, R., & Greenhaus, J. H. (2004) The relation between career
decision-making strategies and person–job fit: A study of job
changers. Journal of Vocational Behavior, 64(1), 198-221.
Supangco, V. T. (2010) Organizational and individual determinants of
career success, UP College of Business Administration
Discussion Papers.
Tate, R. L. (1994) An investigation of the vantage-point effect on
perception of individual behavior in an organization,
unpublished thesis, college of the university of Illinois at
Urbana-Champaign.
Thomas, K. W., & Tymon Jr, W. G. (1997). Bridging the motivation gap
in total quality. Quality Management Journal, 4(2), 80-96.
Valcour, M., & Ladge, J. J. (2008) Family and career path characteristics
as predictors of women’s objective and subjective career
success: Integrating traditional and protean career explanations.
Journal of Vocational Behavior, 73(2), 300-309.
Verbruggen M. (2011) Psychological mobility and career success in the
‘new’ career climate. Journal of Vocational Behavior. 81(2),
289–297
Vilela, B., Varela González, J.A., & Fernández, F. P. (2008) Person–
organization fit, OCB and Performance Appraisal: evidence from
matched supervisor– salesperson data set in a Spanish context.
Industrial Marketing Management, 37(8), 1005-1019.
Wahiza N. & Wahat, A. (2011) Towards developing a theoretical
framework on career Success. Asian Social Science,7(3).
Wanga, Y., Jeou-Shyan H., & Shu-Yun, C. (2011) Factors influencing
food and beverage employees’ career success: a contextual
Identifying Perceptual Factors… Mohsen, Tahereh, Narges & Hojat
Journal of Managerial Sciences Volume VIII Number 2 273
perspective. International Journal of Hospitality Management,
30, 997-1007.
Wiese, B. S., Freund A. M., & Baltes, P.B. (2002) Subjective career
success and emotional well-Being: longitudinal predictive power
of selection, optimization, and compensation. Journal of
Vocational Behavior, 60, 321-335.
Young, S. J., & Jamieson, L. M. (2001) Delivery methodology of the
Delphi: A comparison of two approaches. Journal of Park and
Recreation Administration, 19(1), 42-58.
Zella King, (2002) Career self-management: Its nature, causes and
consequences. Journal of Vocational Behavior, 65, 112–133.
Zoharah, O., Krauss, S. E., Sail, R. M., & Ismail, I. A. (2011) Exploring
career success of late bloomers from the TVET background,
Education Training. 53(7), 603-624.